Separation

[Taff]

I have a great deal of trouble getting separation between instruments, can anyone offer any help?

Even when I have only 2 instruments, (a harp and a cello for example,) despite panning as hard as I can, they always seem to lack space.

All advice gratefully received.

Taff

[Benedict]

Note choice and arrangement is a big part, then EQ is #2 method. Here is a walkthrough of a simple mix

https://benedictroffmarsh.com/2015/01/2 ... ce-mixing/

[The_G]

Pitch, sound design, arrangement, panning, EQ--in that order.

[Taff]

Many thanks both.

Really interesting Tutorial BTW!

[Marco Raaphorst]

sometimes deleting one instrument can be cool too. if instruments overlap in sound, sometimes one of them is not really needed.

I always keep my arrangements as simple as possible. I stack a lot of tracks, but then will delete many of them later on. sometimes combining/merging two tracks into one. using the computer might keep you adding more and more. but that's good for giving you ideas. later on changing these parts is the way too a great arrangement imo. like writing text. keep adding stuff is not the way to create a great piece.

[Taff]

Cheers mate, sound advice

[TritoneAddiction]

Another advice is to make sure that each instrument has their own role in the frequency range. If you for example have several instruments taking up space in the bass frequencies it will become muddy really fast. Maybe your harp and cello covers the same frequencies (probably fighting with each other in the mids) or even play in the same octave (arrangement).

[Taff]

I think you may be right

[Kenni]

And a little bit of reverb, very short decay and almost completely dry can help as well

[Aikmofobi]

If you're already having problems with just two hard panned instruments you might want to make sure your listening environment is proper. This document, especially appendix 1, is a good resource for setting it up. Also try mixing at a lower volume.

EBU Tech. 3276 Listening conditions for the assessment of sound programme material: monophonic and two–channel stereophonic

[Taff]

Cheers!

[selig]

I have a great deal of trouble getting separation between instruments, can anyone offer any help?

Even when I have only 2 instruments, (a harp and a cello for example,) despite panning as hard as I can, they always seem to lack space.

All advice gratefully received.

Taff

Here's my thoughts on the subject, which is a deep subject to be sure!

I think of panning as width, not depth. I don't think of panning as a tool to create separation, but rather as a tool to create width and horizontal interests (such as panning a hi-hat left and it's delay right).

I say this because I've heard so many mixes that have good separation of elements that are center panned, such as a vocal, bass, or kick/snare.These mixes have accomplished this feat without using panning at all, indicating that panning alone is not necessary to create separation.

I consider the subject of "separation" more about getting things more sharply in focus in the mix. Sounds like you may be experiencing the same issue, where you pan things in every position but they still feel "blurry" and out of focus. When things are in focus in a mix, you can more easily "point to them" as I like to say.

Some things are intended to be intentionally "soft focus", such as a big wide pad, which provides one clue as to how to do the opposite: big wide stereo instruments don't have sharp focus. It would follow that to take a "fuzzy" sound and make it sharper, one thing to try is make sure it's mono as a source (you can pan it anywhere, but it should start mono). This is not always going to solve the problem, it's just one of those things I try when I'm unable to bring an instrument into focus in a mix.

The next aspect to investigate with instruments that are difficult to focus in a mix is spectral energy. Do this by choosing the best sample/preset to start with, and fine tune it with EQ. The simplest way to "focus" an instrument in a mix is, after you've done any "cleaning" (removing mud, etc.) is to find the frequency range that represents the highest concentration of energy that brings the sound forward when boosted. When boosting, think of Q AND frequency - too wide a Q and you're turning everything up, too narrow and you're zoomed in too closely and missing important aspects of the spectrum. When you find the best spot to boost, the EQ gain knob becomes a hyper-volume control - boosting should bring the instrument forward, cutting should push it back (even though you're only working with a fraction of the entire spectrum).

The other parameter to address in addition to the frequency spectrum is the dynamic spectrum. Specifically, the relationship between the transient (peak) energy and the average (sustain) energy. More sustain energy can bring things forward, but too much and you've removed all the power of the original dynamics. More peak energy and you can punch an instrument through the mix, but too much and you'll overload the peaks of the mix while still not hearing the instrument in question. The key for me has been in finding the best balance for each instrument to keep it at the desired "focus".

Like a photograph, you don't necessarily want EVERYTHING in focus on every mix. "Focus" is just one more aspect of "balancing" a mix, and as with all things it's best to get the foundation (balances) as close and strong as possible before moving on to focus and other aspects


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[T.G.]

As usual, Selig has some great insights - to expand on the "opposite of big and wide" point he makes, i find the width control knobs on the SSL very useful in giving a more "specific" panning position. Often for drums i will take the width down on all of them ... its worth experimenting with!

[selig]

As usual, Selig has some great insights - to expand on the "opposite of big and wide" point he makes, i find the width control knobs on the SSL very useful in giving a more "specific" panning position. Often for drums i will take the width down on all of them ... its worth experimenting with!

I often do the same with short drum reverbs, so the drums don't spread out to fill the entire sound stage. Keep the tips coming!

[Noplan]

If you deal with real instruments you should make the most decisions during the recording process. microphone positioning can help a lot to make good and better separations.

Listen to a instrument from a distance and you will notice that it sounds thinner. But if you record all instruments very close, you can't put them in that same space without processing the hell out of them.

You can do that, but then you have to understand a lot about psychoacoustics and how you can recreate these illusions on two loudspeakers by using a limited space in the frequency spectrum.

One way is to emphasize the characteristics of an instrument and cut unimportant frequencies that clash with the charecterstics of other instruments. If you solo an instrument of a good mix it can sound very thin and strange but in combination it sounds awesome because the main trick is that they complete each other.

And thats why EQ Automation is important too. When less instruments are playing you can bring up the missing frequencies.

[Taff]

Cheers guys some thought provoking replies.

Martin Hannett's production on Joy Division albums sets the gold standard for me.